Get out and knock on doors. My father’s latest column explains why, based on his own experience as a candidate (with an 11–2 election record). Six months of door-knocking–every two years–helped him far outperform his party, and win some tough elections.
The column also examines how the Colorado state Department of Regulatory Affairs might regulate medical marijuana dispensaries.
ruuffles says:
I guess a quarter of the time of the term spent campaigning is better than half.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 2:00 pmOctavian says:
As someone who has sucessfully won local elections (despite being outspent 3–1 by the local machine) via door-to-door campaigning, I found that going door-to-door not only allowed me to communicate my “campaign message” to the individual voter, but also provided me with an opportunity to listen to a constituent who otherwise did not have time to come to public meetings or my “office hours.”
Quote
January 20, 2010, 2:17 pmdew says:
A close relative won a traditionally Republican district as a Democrat that way. Not only was she from the other party, but she was from the 3rd smallest of four towns in the district (probably an even bigger disadvantage than party). She asked how to win an election from some experts, and was told (amongst other advice) that while rarely done, no one had ever lost an election in the legislature in living memory if they went door-to-door to every house in the district — unless the opponent did the same thing.
She went through three pairs of shoes, visited every home, and won both the primary and the general election, both hotly contested. In the general election, she either lost one or no precincts in the entire district (memory fades). She held the seat for over 2 decades.
Another lesson (maybe for Martha Coakley) was from another family member, who won as a republican legislator in an old Massachusetts blue-collar union mill town. The democrat campaigned on his MBA, his experience, and that he was a democrat. The republican did a lot of hand-shaking, and campaigned as a regular guy, a state employee who had worked for years in a mill, was ex-WW2 military, and would listen to them (he was and is a pretty humble guy and a good listener). He won by a comfortable margin.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 2:19 pmRPT says:
Excellent advice; heeded by Scott Brown but not so much (if at all) by Martha Coakley.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 2:20 pmguy in the veal calf office says:
The Conspiracy needs to get to door knocking, its growth in page views from 2008 to 2009, 6.7%, is dwarfed by the growth for for Althouse, Leiter and Instapundit.
I kid.....
Quote
January 20, 2010, 2:40 pmVisitor Agin says:
You say that as if having personal contact with and listening to the views of constituents are not part of the job of a public office holder (or candidate for public office). I’d say that in a democratic society, that is at least as important as, if not more important than, schmoozing with other politicians at the statehouse. It is time that ought not to be begrudged.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 3:32 pmVisitor Again says:
There’s no edit function for getting your own posting name wrong–as in “Visitor Agin” instead of “Visitor Again.”
Quote
January 20, 2010, 3:37 pmzippypinhead says:
Your father’s wisdom reminds us that Tip O’Neill (at least this time) may have been onto something when he said “all politics is local.”
Important gloss on the door-knocking issue that’s implicit in your father’s column: It’s the candidate him/herself who needs to meet the voters. Sending surrogates, while arguably useful to distribute literature and in targeted get-out-the-vote drives, simply isn’t the same thing. Many contemporary candidates seem not to grasp this basic fact. While enthusiastic, young party activists ringing doorbells may have a purpose (assuming they don’t overdo it to the point of becoming annoying pests who simply tick off the voter), there’s no substitute in the voter’s mind for getting face time with the actual candidate.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 5:32 pmhattio says:
Hmmm,
Here’s a bit of a counter-point. My father ran for the borough assembly (think county board of supervisors) and scheduled time to go to each community and knock on doors. The weekend he wanted to go to one particular community he was sick, and he never made it back. That was the ONLY community he won. Draw your own conclusions.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 5:57 pmruuffles says:
I agree with your statements. I was making a vague reference to election 2008 where senators from IL, NY, AZ, DE, CT spent all their time in IA starting after election 2006.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 6:21 pmVisitor Again says:
Well I agree with you on this, too. The time spent on national political campaigns is far too long–and it doesn’t really involve listening to constituents either.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 7:30 pmCrunchy Frog says:
How’d that work out for the senator from CT? I can’t remember...
Quote
January 20, 2010, 7:32 pmBenP says:
Of course it does, except it’s just those constituents with money to donate.
I mean hey, the law of averages says SOMEONE in my district must own stock in the company of whatever corporate rep happens to be paying for lunch today.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 7:43 pmDave N. says:
As a candidate for office this year, I am taping to my refrigerator (and putting as the first page of my campaign plan) this quote I mined from the recent Brown-Coakley campaign:
Reuters, December 9, 2009.
Quote
January 20, 2010, 9:17 pmkimsch says:
I’ve always had a better feeling about those candidates who took the time to seek me out, to come to my home and meet me and find out what my thoughts are rather than just telling me what he or she is going to do. Depending on what I know about the candidate that personal touch can mean the candidate gets my vote.
Dave N. — good luck!
Quote
January 20, 2010, 10:55 pmliamascorcaigh says:
I’ve been both knocker and knockee in my day and while personal contact is important it works far better both practically and politically in a local government level election where the candidate’s personal attributes very often can overcome otherwise adverse conditions. For national level not so much. With the Health Care fiasco, the trillion $ debt, the ineffectual stimulus and high unemployment hanging like a bunch of plump albatrosses about her neck I’d say Martha Coakley would have found the more doors she knocked on the more depressed she got.
Once Brown gained momentum and the unholy thought of voting Republican ceased to be an act of sacrilege against “the faithful departed” a psychological barrier was broken among the voters and the hitherto inchoate rage cascaded into the ballot box.
So it’s not that Coakley didn’t ask the question; it’s that the answer was “No!”.
Quote
January 21, 2010, 8:35 amruuffles says:
I don’t see what your point is. The Senators from IL, DE, and NY are now president, vice president, and sec of state. The Senator from AZ is facing a serious primary challenge, while the Senator from CT is stepping down with the overwhelming frontrunner (Coakley natch) being from the same party.
Quote
January 21, 2010, 8:57 am